D&D General What does the mundane high level fighter look like? [+]

[Micah Sweet]

Actually, you already provided an example of what it represents.



That's what the mechanics are depicting. It's simple.



I mean, this bit of hyperbole actually summarizes what I see as the main issue here.

The suggestion doesn't "compromise the universe". If it compromises anything, it's persistent mechanics. But what are the mechanics meant for? To dictate how the world works? Do they rule the world or serve it?

It seems that you want the mechanics to rule the world. I would argue that they are tools. They are means, not ends. So you use the tools you like to get the results that you hope for.

Minion rules or any similar example are no different. They don't "compromise the universe".

They do for me. I want mechanics to model the world, not for the world to bend to the mechanics. I've been clear about this for years.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Coincidentally, WoTC just dropped Chains of Asmodeus, which is a high level source book (level 11-20), and Ted from Nerd Immersion said "it's the best thing WotC has made in a while."

He also says that the balance focus is on level 1-10 (which makes sense because that's where most people play), but doesn't say levels 11-20 is broken. Just says the focus wasn't there.

WotC didn't make Chains of Asmodeus. They just approved it and are selling it like its theirs. Many official WotC 5e products are made this way, and they're often quite good. A disturbing correlation if you ask me.

 

[hawkeyefan]

They do for me. I want mechanics to model the world, not for the world to bend to the mechanics. I've been clear about this for years.

But your insistence on persistent mechanics forces the world to bend to them. Minion rules and similar rules are actually the world dictating how the mechanics work, not the mechanics dictating how the world works.

Your priorities seem confused.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Actually, you already provided an example of what it represents.

That's what the mechanics are depicting. It's simple.

But you don't need such a kludge. If the characters get more powerful as they level, they will actually be able to beat those same monsters that were too much for them earlier, without having to replace the monsters with balloon facsimiles. And at least to me it will feel more satisfying that way.

And I think it is just confused to have the enemies downscale. Why we have both upscaling characters and downscaling enemies? Aren't these in effect representing the same thing? Also what if the same enemy is fighting characters and their allies that are of different levels? Compared to whom is the enemy scaled then? It is just an unnecessary ugly mess.

I mean, this bit of hyperbole actually summarizes what I see as the main issue here.

The suggestion doesn't "compromise the universe". If it compromises anything, it's persistent mechanics. But what are the mechanics meant for? To dictate how the world works? Do they rule the world or serve it?

It seems that you want the mechanics to rule the world. I would argue that they are tools. They are means, not ends. So you use the tools you like to get the results that you hope for.

Minion rules or any similar example are no different. They don't "compromise the universe".

They compromise objectivity of the universe, and that bothers me. I get that this is a difference in attitude and not everyone feels the same way, but to me this is important. I want the world and the mechanics to be in sync, informing each other. Jake the ogre has certain stats that represent him, and those are objective. They do not change depending on who he is fighting.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But your insistence on persistent mechanics forces the world to bend to them. Minion rules and similar rules are actually the world dictating how the mechanics work, not the mechanics dictating how the world works.

Your priorities seem confused.

I think not. My priorities are quite clear, and right where I want them. You just don't agree and are therefore trying to cast shade on my preference. Minion rules are the gamist priorities taking precedence over the setting in order to force the creation of a desired narrative. Not what I want.

 

[Sacrosanct]

WotC didn't make Chains of Asmodeus. They just approved it and are selling it like its theirs. Many official WotC 5e products are made this way, and they're often quite good. A disturbing correlation if you ask me.

The project lead, James Ohlen, works for WotC for their Archetype Entertainment division. He's also written a lot of other D&D stuff for WoTC. If an employee of WoTC writes a product and is released by WotC, then that means WotC "made" it, right?

 

[Oofta]

WotC didn't make Chains of Asmodeus. They just approved it and are selling it like its theirs. Many official WotC 5e products are made this way, and they're often quite good. A disturbing correlation if you ask me.

The point is that an adventure that goes to level 20 has good reviews, something that I don't think would happen if the game fell apart at higher levels as some people proclaim.

 

[Oofta]

Coincidentally, WoTC just dropped Chains of Asmodeus, which is a high level source book (level 11-20), and Ted from Nerd Immersion said "it's the best thing WotC has made in a while."

He also says that the balance focus is on level 1-10 (which makes sense because that's where most people play), but doesn't say levels 11-20 is broken. Just says the focus wasn't there.

Yeah, most games end for various reasons before they get to high levels. From a DM's perspective it can be more work, but I think it's still worth it.

 

[Minigiant]

I've run and/or played in 3 different games that have gone to 16th without major issues. I can't speak for Tier 4, but I'm not sure where the obvious problems would be in Tier 3, with the possible exceptions of simulacrum and magic jar abuse.

It works fine for me whether I was DMing or playing. I would agree that 3E was broken after a certain level. But high level 5E? Again, the same half dozen or so posters are the ones beating that drum. I guarantee it is not universally accepted.

I don't want to repeat the same things again and create another one of those topics.

But the statement I've said has been said numerous times on social media and other forums. The "it's only here" thing is a myth.

Now if you are staying their is a Massive Online Bubble, you might have something. But it's big

 

[TwoSix]

I don't want to repeat the same things again and create another one of those topics.

But the statement I've said has been said numerous times on social media and other forums. The "it's only here" thing is a myth.

Now if you are staying their is a Massive Online Bubble, you might have something. But it's big

Oh, I think it's very much the conventional wisdom that high-level play bogs down and is nearly unplayable.

I just think the conventional wisdom is wrong.